Assiel's page

Maybe I've been using Crane Wing wrong this whole time, but under my reading it isn't as powerful as some here have been claiming.

Read "you can deflect one melee weapon attack".

I take this to mean an actual weapon attack, otherwise why would they not simply say "one melee attack"?

This also prevents Crane Wing from completely being untouchable against a T-Rex and whatnot.

Writer, I think the disconnect here is that you think damage reduction takes place afterwards. This is incorrect by the rules we both quoted.

You have two options for applying damage reduction:

1. Ignore an amount of damage from each normal attack.
2. Subtract 1 (represents the DR amount) from the damage the barbarian takes each time she is dealt damage from a weapon or a natural attack.

Incidentally, they both end with the same result. You do not take damage and then undo it.

Here is what the SRD says about that:

For example, DR 5/magic means that a creature takes 5 less points of damage from all weapons that are not magic.

This is a specific example of how to apply damage reduction.

Now, for descriptive purposes to indicate from a DM to his players the SRD says:

Sometimes damage reduction represents instant healing. Sometimes it represents the creature's tough hide or body. In either case, other characters can see that conventional attacks won't work.

Could you please indicate which specific section says it applies after damage is taken?

Damage Reduction (Ex)

At 7th level, a barbarian gains damage reduction. Subtract 1 from the damage the barbarian takes each time she is dealt damage from a weapon or a natural attack.

Invulnerability (Ex)

At 2nd level, the invulnerable rager gains DR/— equal to half her barbarian level. This damage reduction is doubled against nonlethal damage.

This ability replaces uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, and damage reduction.

Damage Reduction

Some magic creatures have the supernatural ability to instantly heal damage from weapons or ignore blows altogether as though they were invulnerable.

The numerical part of a creature's damage reduction (or DR) is the amount of damage the creature ignores from normal attacks. Usually, a certain type of weapon can overcome this reduction (see Overcoming DR). This information is separated from the damage reduction number by a slash. For example, DR 5/magic means that a creature takes 5 less points of damage from all weapons that are not magic. If a dash follows the slash, then the damage reduction is effective against any attack that does not ignore damage reduction.

Guarded Life (Ex)

Benefit: While raging, if the barbarian is reduced below 0 hit points, 1 hit point of lethal damage per barbarian level is converted to nonlethal damage. If the barbarian is at negative hit points due to lethal damage, she immediately stabilizes.

So if I understand the argument, the claim is that the converted damage is subject to damage reduction of the invulnerable rager. This rager takes damage and ignores the appropriate amount from the normal DR/-.

Now after this, if the rager is then still reduced below, not at, but below 0 hit points, guarded life then converts an appropriate amount of the remaining lethal damage into nonlethal damage.

So the real question is, what is the source of the nonlethal damage? If the source is guarded life, then it is not a "normal attack" as stated in the damage reduction entry and does not qualify to be ignored.

If however, the nonlethal damage is from the attack, then sure the rager ignores the appropriate amount of nonlethal damage as afforded to him by his invulnerabilty ability. (sounds stupid saying those two words together)

A strict reading might indicate the nonlethal damage is from guarded life, as you wouldn't be dealt nonlethal damage otherwise in this example. I am not saying a agree with this, but simply presenting that as food for thought.

Writer, making statements without any backing is otherwise known to be an opinion. This is "your" currently accepted interpretation.

Edit: Response to a deleted post.

Except that is not how damage reduction works.

Damage Reduction (Ex or Su)

The entry indicates the amount of damage ignored (usually 5 to 15 points) and the type of weapon that negates the ability.

Format: DR 5/silver; Location: Defensive Abilities.

You ignore the damage, thus someone with DR 10/- that takes 20 points of damage ignores 10 of it, and only takes the remaining 10 points.

In this example, if this character only had 15 hit points, he would ignore 10 damage and take the other 10, thus leaving him at 5 hit points.

This same character never dropped below 0 hit points.

Also, you don't understand how Feather Fall works. It doesn't trigger off of falling damage. The ring activates upon falling 5 feet while the spell is cast as an immediate action.

Short of this, it seems as though I lack the ability to explain the way it works in a way that you would understand. I wish you the best of luck and hope that you have a DM that doesn't mind house rules.

Writer, you focused on the part that wasn't really my main point.

I was referring to this:

I interpret it as he would take no damage. This will keep him at 20 if he was to take 22 damage, since all 22 damage is converted to nonlethal. But it also means the DR 18/- can't be factored in twice. : / i didn't think people though such a thing is possible. 40 is insane enough.

If he is at 20 damage after the attack, how in Gorum's name did Guarded Life do anything? Guarded Life only does something if you are brought below 0 hit points, which in this case he wasn't.

Either he is brought below 0 hit points or he isn't. If he was brought below 0 hit points, how did he heal back up to 20 hit points? I don't see anything about healing lost hit points?

I'm confused here.

"Benefit: While raging, if the barbarian is reduced below 0 hit points..."

How in the world are you guys coming up with all of this DR business resulting in being at anything greater than -1 hit points?

Guarded life only does anything at all when reduced below 0 hit points. So take your damage, apply your DR, if that drops you below 0, then covert. It's only purpose is to keep you from death due to loss of raging Constitution.

Now I will, however, concede that I'm not exactly keen on how it works if you were already below 0 hit points prior to the attack, such as from using diehard.

It's disappointing to see these responses.

Relevant piece from Charge:

"A charging character gets a +2 bonus on combat maneuver attack rolls made to bull rush an opponent."

Relevant piece from Bull Rush:

"You can make a bull rush as a standard action or as part of a charge, in place of the melee attack."

Relevant piece from Overrun:

"As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square."

Both Bull Rush and Overrun require a standard action to use, leaving you with a move action. (and swift/immediate)

-OR-

Both Bull Rush and Overrun can be used as part of a charge. Bull Rush replaces the melee attack and also gets the +2 bonus from charging to Bull Rush. Overrun replaces nothing with a charge, and you don't get a +2 bonus from charging to overrun, however you do still get the +2 bonus from charging to make your melee attack against the charged target.

Many people like to make assumptions, but the words simply are not there to make the claim that an overrun charge replaces the melee attack.

Did I miss something, like a FAQ stating something new? If not, then I cannot understand where the misunderstanding comes from.

Comeliness rating of 26!!!

It's quiet as the grave around here, or at least one without undead.

Interesting Ozzy, I've been itching to fight some trolls ever since we heard about the troubles they were causing.

Just realized there is an "OOC" format, doh.

I'd write something, but I can't progress much at the moment.

Pausing for a moment to allow Kellen a proper greeting with lady Margaret, "Alex sends his regards. His duties have detained him and I fear he may be away for some time. Do not worry though, I will check on him and at the first sign of trouble...well let's just say Kellen here has more than a few tricks up his sleeves."

I feel like this thread is getting stuck in the weeds.

Depending on how you look at things, or run the math, the fighter may or may not be fumbling more in a given round as he progresses. This all depends on the criteria set forth and what you are comparing.

The net effect in a given session, is that the more attack rolls you make, the more chances you have to fumble, player character or monster.

Regardless, What is the benefit of the fumble rules for a given table?

I could just describe a character who rolled a 1 as having clashed blades with his foe, causing him to nearly lose his grip as he felt the strength in his opponents sword arm.

While I wouldn't want to describe every attack roll made, it seems more fun to simply use storytelling to add that sort of flavor.

If you want a player character to be disarmed, use the combat maneuver against them. A fighter that has gloves of dueling won't drop his weapon when stunned or panicked, but god help him if he rolls a 1, then he somehow drops it.

Also, how do these fumble rules apply to combat maneuvers? Roll a 1 on an overrun maneuver and you trip? It just seems silly to apply an arbitrary rule to one subsection of options available to a player.

Rynjin, the only issue with that is then the caster will simply cast spells that don't deal damage (which is generally considered a better option anyways).

I sort of like the idea of adding randomness, but I don't think fumble rules really accomplish this in a way that I'm happy with.

I'd much prefer a DM simply roll a hidden percentile once per each players turn and some kind of "mishap" happens. You'd then be able to adjust the percentile threshold as desired. This is a neat and orderly solution that can make use of every option a character employs. The drawback is that it likely requires a quick thinking DM to use imaginative methods of mishaps.

Another example of adding houserules to impede martial classes.

Why is it that the higher level a fighter gets, the more he drops his weapon and yet the higher level a caster gets, the same does not happen?

What happens when a wizard rolls a 1 on his scorching ray? Other than missing, does he suffer an equivalent mishap?

What happens when a cleric rolls a 1 on his concentration check to cast defensively? Other than failing the spell, does he suffer an extra mishap?

I'd like to see some spells rebound or explode on the caster if "fumble" rules are in place for martials.

My 2 cp.

Maybe present some trainers and if you feel like it would be a terrible choice, you could always RP that the trainer doesn't think the player has the makings of that class.

Yep, agreed, but then you use up your only advantage (bonus feat) for playing a human, as well as your first character feat. Burning two feats to gain a bite attack, or just play a half-orc and not burn a single feat.

Of course, barring role-play reasons for being human.

I'm surprised nobody mentioned this before, but the Adopted trait does not give you access to racial traits from the actual races. It gives you access to the race traits category of traits for a particular race that you otherwise wouldn't qualify for.

The trait would be very OP if it allowed you to do that. Humans adopted by dwarves with darkvision, etc. Why get a measly +1 to a saving throw trait when you can get a +1 to all of them if you are adopted by half-orcs with sacred tattoos.

Anything with Mounted Combat as a prerequisite will take care of the majority of the feats. Though, keep in mind it doesn't have the clause that allows you to take feats with which you do not meet the prerequisites.

I'd also say any mounted feats that have other non-mounted feats as prerequisites could count. Though that may be more of a RAI thing.

I have to disagree with Tyki11 on this.

The wording specifically says "gains armor training as normal".

The only change is an added perk when using a tower shield, but nothing is taken away. It never occurred to me before that you also reduce a shield armor check penalty, but Tower Shield Training clearly seems to indicate that you normally would, only that now you get an added bonus with this particular archetype.

The wording implies that you might only get the "added" benefits for the tower shield only while still gaining the normal benefits for you armor. However, the wording doesn't clarify it and as far as I can tell by RAW you apple the "added" bonus to both. Though, that may not be the intent.

In the end, you clearly at a minimum get the normal armor training benefits as per usual, with the bonus being up in the air if it applies to the suit of armor as well.

Let me get this straight,

A Young Brass Dragon is a CR7 or an effective cohort level of 15 according to the monstrous cohorts table.

So I believe that means you have to be level 17 to get this cohort, assuming you have a high enough leadership score. (Still must follow the level restrictions for cohorts, that being PC level -2).

An Avoral is listed as an effective level of 15, lets compare.

HP: 94 (avoral) vs 76 (dragon)

AC: 25 (avoral) vs 21 (dragon)

Actually, it isn't even close when you compare them, the brass dragon is rocking a few non-combat 1st-level spells and only 4/day at that compared to the avoral's unlimited dimension door, hold person, blur, and lightning bolt 3/day.

Then we get into the avoral's lay on hands, many many different types of vision, better saves, better everything compared to the dragon.

It seems to me that they aren't even close to equal, so why is the effective level so high? CR + 8 seems a little extreme.

Now check out the Wyvern at an effective cohort level of 10. They have nearly identical stats. I admit, it has slightly more utility, and is technically 1 CR higher.

In the end, it seems perfectly balanced at an effective cohort level of 11, requiring the PC to be level 13. It is definitely not the RAW level 15 cohort.

If the DM has issues, sacrificing your familiar permanently and doing some RP to gain the service of this dragon sounds balanced at a cohort level 11 rating. Anything higher would be foolish, as you could simply just get a wyvern and be way better off.